I know this bot just reposts from /r/whitePeopleTwitter, but what about this is ‘white’?
The actual New Scientist article is a lot more ambiguous.
And here’s another article, also from NS.
I don’t think “people feel better when you give them free money with no strings attached and tell them they can’t get other benefits” is actually groundbreaking research.
Also, “doesn’t disincentivize working” is not the same as “actually incentivizes working”.
> Mr Simanainen says that while some individuals found work, they were no more likely to do so than a control group of people who weren’t given the money. They are still trying to work out exactly why this is, for the final report that will be published in 2020.
Not to mention the assumption that what “worked” in Finland will automatically work everywhere else. Or even that this is economically feasible.
My favourite conclusion, which I don’t see listed here but maybe that’s because it was brought up shortly after the program ended, people trusted the government more.
Which honestly when I read the research paper my eyes started to gloss over, by the end of it I was terribly annoyed that they had used as many words as they had when I could have gotten the point out in 2 words instead of 2 pages.
Bribery Works
Though they don’t take into account what happens when all of a sudden the bribe is no longer big enough.
Which is going to wind up being the defining problem anyone that tries to set this up on a national scale is going to have deal with.
This concept is ultimately about developing a rationing system for when the dried up husk of the current system falls away. Wait and see.
Yup, they're in the process of destroying the "old system" now. Here's a taste of what they want to replace it with. (From WEForum) this is what they want within the next 10 years and they're getting it!
